From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Online RAID-5 resizing Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:23:26 +0200 Message-ID: <20050921192326.GA30405@uio.no> References: <20050920143346.GA5777@uio.no> <17200.9302.242957.23189@cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17200.9302.242957.23189@cse.unsw.edu.au> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 01:01:42AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > I doubt speed is a top priority. I just found something interesting; if I raise speed_limit_min, I get much better speed than I initially got. My 2->4 slow IDE disk setup: md1 : active raid5 hdg1[4] hde1[5] hdc1[1] hda1[0] 39078016 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/2] [UU__] [==========>..........] resync = 52.4% (20499840/39078016) finish=50.0min speed=6187K/sec This is more than good enough for me, at least. :-) I noticed a problem during a big test resize now, BTW; for some reason, pdflush goes into uninterruptable sleep, and kjournald and thus the filesystem seems to follow. I'm not sure if this is a starvation issue or not, but it sure is a bug -- I'll look into it and see if I find something obvious. /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/